51990 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Nor does this rule 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on state and local governments. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collections were 

previously approved under OMB 

control number 0560–0198, but the 

package was retired since there are less 

than ten respondents annually and the 

collections are, therefore, not subject to 

the Paperwork Burden Act. The number 

of estimated annual respondents is not 

increased by this rule. 

Federal Assistance Program 

The changes affect the following 

program listed in the Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance: 10.421—Indian 

Tribes and Tribal Corporation Loans. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 770 

Agriculture, Credit, Indians, Rural 

areas, Loan programs. 

■ Accordingly, for the reasons stated in 

the preamble, 7 CFR part 770 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 770—INDIAN TRIBAL LAND 

ACQUISITION LOANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 770 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 25 U.S.C. 488. 

■ 2. Amend § 770.2 by revising the 

definition of ‘‘rental value’’ in paragraph 

(b) to read as follows: 

§ 770.2 Abbreviations and definitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Rental value for the purpose of rental 

value write-downs, equals the average 

actual rental proceeds received from the 

lease of land acquired under ITLAP. If 

there are no rental proceeds, then rental 

value will be based on market data 

according to § 770.10(e)(4). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 770.10 by revising 

paragraph (e)(4)(iii) to read as follows: 

§ 770.10 Servicing. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(iii) The borrower provides a record of 

any actual rents received for the land for 

the preceding 5 years, which will be 

used to calculate the average rental 

value. This record must be certified by 

the Department of the Interior. For land 

that has not been leased or has not 

received any rental income, the 

borrower must provide a market value 

rent study report for the preceding 5 

years, which identifies the average 

annual rental value based on the market 

data. The market value rent study report 

must be prepared by a certified general 

appraiser and meet the requirements of 

USPAP. 

* * * * * 

Signed in Washington, DC, on September 

6, 2007. 

Teresa C. Lasseter, 

Administrator, Farm Service Agency. 

[FR Doc. E7–18032 Filed 9–11–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 981 

[Docket No. AMS–FV–07–0051; FV07–981–

2 FR] 

Almonds Grown in California; Change 

in Requirements for Interhandler 

Transfers of Almonds 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule revises the 

requirements for interhandler transfers 

of almonds under the administrative 

rules and regulations of the California 

almond marketing order (order). The 

order regulates the handling of almonds 

grown in California and is administered 

locally by the Almond Board of 

California (Board). This rule requires 

handlers who transfer almonds to other 

handlers to report to the Board whether 

or not the almonds were treated to 

achieve a 4-log reduction in Salmonella 

bacteria (Salmonella). This action will 

help the Board track treated and 

untreated almonds and facilitate 

administration of its mandatory 

Salmonella treatment program. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 13, 

2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maureen T. Pello, Assistant Regional 

Manager, or Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional 

Manager, California Marketing Field 

Office, Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, Telephone: (559) 487–

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or E-mail: 

Maureen.Pello@usda.gov, or 

Kurt.Kimmel@usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or E-mail: 

Jay.Guerber@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule is issued under Marketing Order 

No. 981, as amended (7 CFR part 981), 

regulating the handling of almonds 

grown in California, hereinafter referred 

to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective 

under the Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 

U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This rule is not intended 

to have retroactive effect. This final rule 

will not preempt any State or local laws, 

regulations, or policies, unless they 

present an irreconcilable conflict with 

this rule. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. A handler 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling. 

This final rule revises the 

requirements for interhandler transfers 

of almonds under the administrative 

rules and regulations of the order. This 

rule require handlers who transfer 

almonds to other handlers to report to 

the Board whether or not the almonds 

were treated to achieve a 4-log reduction 

in Salmonella. A mandatory treatment 

program to reduce the potential for 

Salmonella in almonds took effect in 

September 2007. This action will enable 

the Board to track treated and untreated 

almonds and help facilitate 

administration of its mandatory 

treatment program. This action was 

unanimously recommended by the 

Board at a meeting on March 28, 2007. 

Section 981.55 of the order provides 

authority for handlers to, upon notice to 

and under supervision of the Board, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 51991 

transfer almonds to another handler. 

Marketing order obligations regarding 

volume regulation, when in effect, and 

assessments must be fully met and may 

be divided between the participating 

handlers. Section 981.455 requires 

handlers to report to the Board on ABC 

Form No. 7, ‘‘Interhandler Transfer of 

Almonds,’’ information regarding 

interhandler transfers. Paragraph (a) of 

that section currently requires the 

following information: (1) Date of 

transfer; (2) the names and plant 

locations of both the transferring and 

receiving handlers; (3) the variety of 

almonds transferred; (4) whether the 

almonds are shelled or unshelled; and 

(5) the name of the handler assuming 

reserve and assessment obligations on 

the almonds transferred. 

In August 2006, the Board 

recommended a mandatory treatment 

program to reduce the potential for 

Salmonella in almonds. USDA engaged 

in informal rulemaking to implement 

the program. A final rule was published 

on March 30, 2007 (61 FR 15021). 

Beginning in September 2007, handlers 

must subject their almonds to a process 

that achieves a 4-log reduction in 

Salmonella prior to shipment. The 

program exempts untreated almonds 

that are shipped to manufacturers in the 

U.S., Canada, and Mexico who agree to 

treat the almonds and untreated 

almonds that are shipped outside the 

U.S., Canada, and Mexico. 

To help track treated and untreated 

almonds, the Board met in March 2007 

and recommended revising the order’s 

administrative rules and regulations to 

require handlers to report to the Board 

whether or not almonds transferred to 

other handlers were treated under the 

mandatory treatment program. Handlers 

must include an identification number 

for each lot transferred. This number 

may be a contract number or other 

unique handler number that can 

identify the lot. Under the mandatory 

Salmonella treatment program, handler 

records must provide the ability to 

differentiate treated from untreated 

almonds (§ 981.442(b)(5)). Requiring 

handlers to provide lot identification 

numbers on their interhandler transfer 

forms complements this requirement. 

These changes to the interhandler 

transfer requirements will help facilitate 

administration of the mandatory 

Salmonella treatment program. 

Paragraph (a) in § 981.455 is revised 

accordingly. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) 

has considered the economic impact of 

this rule on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this final regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

There are approximately 6,000 

producers of almonds in the production 

area and approximately 110 handlers 

subject to regulation under the 

marketing order. Small agricultural 

producers are defined by the Small 

Business Administration (13 CFR 

121.201) as those having annual receipts 

of less than $750,000, and small 

agricultural service firms are defined as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $6,500,000. 

Data for the most recently completed 

crop year indicate that about 52 percent 

of the handlers shipped under 

$6,500,000 worth of almonds. Dividing 

the average almond crop values for 

2003–04, 2004–05, and 2005–06 as 

reported by the National Agricultural 

Statistics Service ($2.105 billion) by the 

number of producers (6,000) yields an 

average annual producer revenue 

estimate of about $350,000. Based on 

the foregoing, about half of the handlers 

and a majority of almond producers may 

be classified as small entities. 

This rule revises § 981.455(a) of the 

order’s administrative rules and 

regulations to require handlers who 

transfer almonds to other handlers to 

report to the Board whether or not the 

almonds were treated to achieve a 4-log 

reduction in Salmonella. A mandatory 

treatment program to reduce the 

potential for Salmonella in almonds 

took effect in September 2007. This 

action will help the Board track treated 

and untreated almonds and help ensure 

the integrity of its mandatory program. 

Authority for this change is provided in 

§§ 981.55 of the order. 

Regarding the impact of this action on 

affected entities, it merely requires 

handlers who transfer almonds to other 

handlers to indicate on ABC Form No. 

7, ‘‘Interhandler Transfer of Almonds,’’

whether or not the almonds were treated 

to achieve a 4-log reduction in 

Salmonella. Handlers must also include 

a lot identification number for each lot 

transferred. 

Regarding alternatives to this action, 

the Board considered not requiring 

handlers to report whether their 

transferred almonds were treated to 

achieve a 4-log reduction in Salmonella. 

However, this would not allow the 

Board to track treated and untreated 

almonds. Thus, the Board unanimously 

recommended revising the requirements 

regarding interhandler transfers of 

almonds. 

This action slightly modifies the 

reporting requirements for all California 

almond handlers. All handlers must 

currently report their interhandler 

transfers to the Board on ABC Form No. 

7, ‘‘Interhandler Transfer of Almonds.’’

This form had been approved by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under OMB No. 0581–0178, 

Vegetable and Specialty Crops. This rule 

requires that two extra columns be 

added to this form. One column allows 

handlers to indicate whether or not the 

transferred almonds were treated to 

achieve a 4-log reduction in Salmonella. 

The second column provides for 

inclusion of a lot identification number 

for tracking purposes. In accordance 

with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the revised form has 

been submitted to the OMB for 

approval. Once approved, this 

information collection will be merged 

into OMB No. 0581–0178. It is estimated 

that it will take a handler about 0.5 hour 

per response, and that 50 handlers will 

respond and submit the form five times 

per year. Thus, the total annual 

reporting burden for the form is 

estimated at 125 hours per year. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or 

conflict with this rule. As with all 

Federal marketing order programs, 

reports and forms are periodically 

reviewed to reduce information 

requirements and duplication by the 

industry and public sector agencies. 

Additionally, the meetings were 

widely publicized throughout the 

California almond industry and all 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meetings and participate in 

deliberations on all issues. The Board’s 

Food Quality and Safety Committee 

discussed this issue on January 30, 

2007. The committee recommended the 

change to the Board on March 28, 2007. 

Both of these meetings were public 

meetings and all entities, both large and 

small, were able to express views on 

this issue. 

A proposed rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on June 8, 2007 (72 FR 31759). 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
51992 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Copies of the rule were also mailed or 

sent via facsimile to all almond 

handlers. Finally, the proposal was 

made available through the Internet by 

USDA and the Office of the Federal 

Register. A 60-day comment period 

ending August 7, 2007, was provided for 

interested persons to respond to the 

proposal. 

One comment was received during 

the comment period in response to the 

proposal. The commenter asked if the 

same rules and safeguards apply to 

almonds imported from other countries. 

Almonds are not listed in section 8e of 

Act. Thus, imported almonds are not 

subject to comparable quality 

requirements as those in effect for the 

domestic commodity. 

Accordingly, no changes will be made 

to the rule as proposed, based on the 

comment received. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ 

fv/moab.html. Any questions about the 

compliance guide should be sent to Jay 

Guerber at the previously mentioned 

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

matters presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Board and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

It is further found that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register (5 

U.S.C. 553) because mandatory 

compliance with the Salmonella 

treatment program began September 1, 

2007, and this rule should be in place 

as soon as possible so the Board can 

track treated and untreated almonds. 

Further, handlers are aware of this 

action, which was unanimously 

recommended at a public meeting. Also, 

a 60-day comment period was provided 

for in the proposed rule, and the 

comment received was addressed 

herein. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981 

Almonds, Marketing agreements, 

Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 981 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 981—ALMONDS GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 981 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 981.455 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 981.455 Interhandler transfers. 

(a) Transfers of almonds. Interhandler 

transfers of almonds pursuant to 

§ 981.55 shall be reported to the Board 

on ABC Form 7. The report shall 

contain the following information: 

(1) Date of transfer; 

(2) The names, and plant locations of 

both the transferring and receiving 

handlers; 

(3) The variety of almonds transferred; 

(4) Whether the almonds are shelled 

or unshelled; 

(5) The name of the handler assuming 

reserve and assessment obligations on 

the almonds transferred; 

(6) Whether the almonds had been 

treated to achieve a 4-log reduction in 

Salmonella bacteria, pursuant to 

§ 981.442(b); and 

(7) A unique handler identification 

number for each lot. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 7, 2007. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 07–4490 Filed 9–10–07; 10:05 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 23 

[Docket No. CE266; Special Conditions No. 

23–206–SC] 

Special Conditions: Malibu Power & 

Propeller Int’l, LLC, Piper Models PA–

46–310P and PA–46–350P; Installation 

of a Full Authority Digital Engine 

Control (FADEC) Engine 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the Malibu Power & Propeller 

Int’l, LLC modified Piper Model PA–46–

310P and PA–46–350P airplanes. The 

airplanes, as modified by Malibu Power 

& Propeller Int’l, LLC, will have a novel 

or unusual design feature(s) associated 

with the installation of a full authority 

digital engine control (FADEC) engine. 

The applicable airworthiness 

regulations do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for this 

design feature. These special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

DATES: The effective date of these 

special conditions is September 5, 2007. 

We must receive your comments by 

October 12, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Mail two copies of your 

comments to: Federal Aviation 

Administration, Regional Counsel, 

ACE–7, Attn: Rules Docket No. CE266, 

901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. 

You may deliver two copies to the 

Regional Counsel at the above address. 

Mark your comments: Docket No. 

CE266. You may inspect comments in 

the Rules Docket weekdays, except 

Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 

4 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter L. Rouse, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Small Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas 

City, MO 64106; telephone (816) 329–

4135; facsimile (816) 329–4090. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

has determined that notice and 

opportunity for prior public comment 

hereon are impracticable because these 

procedures would significantly delay 

issuance of the approval design and 

thus delivery of the affected aircraft. In 

addition, the substance of these special 

conditions has been subject to the 

public comment process in several prior 

instances with no substantive comments 

received. The FAA therefore finds that 

good cause exists for making these 

special conditions effective upon 

issuance. 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

written comments, data, or views. The 

most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. We ask that you send 

us two copies of written comments. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

about these special conditions. You can 

inspect the docket before and after the 

comment closing date. If you wish to 

review the docket in person, go to the 

address in the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES